profits that thanr than on actual care. number 2, if you don't have health insurance, we are setting up a group plan that allows you to benefit from group rates that are typically 18% lower than if you are out there trying to get insurance on the individual market. now, the last point i would make, before -- >> jim: 2 minutes is up. >> no. i had 5 seconds before you interrupted me -- was...: [chuckles] >> the irony is that we have seen this model work really well in massachusetts. because governor romney did a good thing, working with democrats in the state to set up what is essentially the identical model and as a consequence people are covered there. it hasn't destroyed jobs. and as a consequence, we now have a system in which we have
the opportunity to start bringing down costs as opposed to just leaving millions out in the cold. >> jim: your five seconds went away a long time ago. governor, tell the president directly why you think what he just said is wrong about obamacare. >> diwith my first statement. but i will go on. >> please, elaborate. >> exactly right. first of all, i like the way we did it in massachusetts. i like the fact that in my state, we had republicans and democrats come together and work together. what i did instead was to push through a plan without a single republican vote. as a matter of fact when massachusetts did something quite extraordinary, elected a republican senator, to stop obamacare, you pushed it through anyway. entirely on a partisan basis, instead of bringing america together and having a discussion on this important top being, you pushed through something that you and nancy pelosi and harry reid thought was the best answer and pushed it through. what we did was work together.
200 legislators, only 2 voted against the plan by the time we were finished. what were some differences? we didn't raise taxes. have you raised them by $twenty one trillion with obamacare. we cannot didn't cut medicare -- of course, we don't have medicare, by $716 billion. we didn't put into place a board to tell people what treatment they could receive. we didn't do something that a number of people recognize, put people in a position where they are going to lose the insurance that they have and they wanted. right now, the cbo says up to 20 million people will lose insurance as obamacare goes into effect next year. likewise, a study by mckensy and company said 30% of them are anticipating dropping people from coverage. so for those reasons, for the tax, for the medicare, for this board and for people losing their insurance, this is why the american people don't want medicare -- don't want obamacare, it's why republicans said do not do this.
the republicans had a plan. they put a plan out. they put a bipartisan plan, it was swept aside. i think something this big, this important, has to be done in a bipartisan baitionz. we have to have a president who can reach across the aisle and fashion important legislation with the input of both parties. >> governor romney says this has to be done in a bipartisan basis. this is a bipartisan idea. this was a republican idea. governor romney at the beginning of this debate broke and said, what we did in massachusetts could be a model for the nation. i agree that the democratic legislators in massachusetts might be giving advice to republicans in congress about how to cooperate. but the fact of the matter is, we used the same advisers and they say it's the same plan. when governor romney talks about this board, for example, unelected board that we have created, what this is is a group of health care expert, doctors,
et cetera, to figure out how can we reduce the cost of care in the system overall? because there are two ways of dealing with our health care crisis. one is to simply leave a whole bunch of people uninsured and let them fend for themselves, to let businesses figure out how long they can continue to pay premiums until they finally give up and the workers are no longer getting insured. and that's been the trend line. or, alternatively, we can figure out how to make the cost of care more effective. there are ways of doing t. cleveland clinic, one of the best health care systems in the world, they actually provide great care cheaper than average. and the reason they do is because they do some smart things. they say, if a patient's coming in, let's get all the doctors together at once and do one test, instead of having the patient run around with 10 tests. let's make sure that we are providing preventive care and catching the onset of something
like diabetes. let's pay providers on the basis of performance as opposed to the basis of how many procedures they have engaged in. now, so what this board does is identify the best practices and says, let's use the purchasing power of medicare and medicaid to help to institutionize all of these good things that we do. the fact of the matter is that when obamacare is fully implemented, we are going to be in a position to show that costs are going down. and over the last 2 years, health care premiums have gone up -- it's true -- but they have gone up slower than at any time in the last 50 years. so we are beginning to see progress. in the meantime, folks with insurance, you are already getting a rebate. lets me make one last point. governor romney says, we should replace it -- i am going to repeal t. but we can replace it
with something. but the problem is, he hasn't described exactly what we would replace it with, other than saying we are going to leave it to the states. but the fact of the matter is that some of the prescriptions that he has offered, like letting you buy insurance across state lines, there is no indication that that is going to help somebody with a pre-existing condition be able to buy insurance. in fact, it's estimated that by repealing obamacare, you are looking at 50 million people losing health insurance at a time when it's vitally important. >> jim: governor, what would you do if obamacare is repealed? how would you replace it? >> it's a leeping -- lengthy description. pre-existing conscience are covered under my plan. young people are able to stay on their family plan. that's offered in the private marketplace. you don't have to have the government mandate that for that to occur. but let's go to something that we agree on. the key task we have in health care is to get the costs down,
so it's more affordable for families and then he has as a model for that doing that, a board of people at the government, an unelected, apointed board who are going to decide what kind of treatment you ought to have. in my opinion, the government is not effective in... in bringing down the cost of almost anything. as a matter of fact, free people and free enterprises, trying to find ways to do things better are able to be more effective than the government will ever be. your example of the cleveland clinic is my case in point, along with several others i could describe. this is the private market. these are enterprises competing with each other, learning how to do better jobs. i used to consult hospitals and to health care providers. i was astonished at the creativity and innovation that exists in the american people. in other words to bring the cost of health care down, we don't need a board of 15 people
telling us what kind of treatment we should have, we instead need to have insurance plans, providers, hospital, doctors, on target, such that they have an incentive, as you say, performance pay, for doing an excellent job for keep being costs down. that's happening. inner mountain, mayo clinic is doing it. cleveland clinic, others. but the right answer is not to have the federal government take over health care and start mandating to the providers across america, telling a patient and a doctor what kind of treatment they can have. that's the wrong way to go. the private market and individual responsibility always work best. >> let me just point out, first of all, this board that we are talking about can't make decisions about what treatments are given. that's explicitly prohibit in the law. but let's go back to what governor romney indicated. under his plan, he would be able to cover people with pre-existing conditions.
well, actually, governor, that isn't what your plan dis. what your plan does is to duplicate what is already the law, which says, if you are out of length insurance for 3 months, then you can end up getting continuous coverage and an insurance company can't deny you if it's been under 90 days. but that's already the law. that doesn't help the millions of people out there with pre-existing conscience. there is a reason why governor romney set up the plan that he did in massachusetts. it wasn't a government takeover of health care. it was the largest expansion of private insurance. but what it does say is that insurers, have you to take everybody. now, that also means have you more customers. but when governor romney says he will replace it with something, but can't detail how it will be in fact replaced and the reason
he set up the system he did in massachusetts was because there isn't a better way of dealing with pre-existing conditions problem. it reminds me, he says he is going to close deductions and loopholes for his tax plan. that's how it is going to be paid for. but we don't know the details. he says he is going to replace dodd frank, wall street reform. but her we don't know which ones. he won't tell us. he now says he will replace obamacare and all the good things will be in there. you don't have to worry. and at some point, i think the american people have to ask themselves, is the reason that governor romney is keeping all of these plans to replace secret because they're too good? is it because somehow middle-class families are going to benefit too much from them? no. the reason is is because when we reform wall street, when we tackle the problem of pre-existing conditions, then
these are tough problems. we have make choices and the choices we have made are ultimately benefitting middle-class families across the country -- >> no, i have to respond to that. my experience as a governor is if i come in and lay down a piece of legislation and say, it's my way or the highway, i don't get a lot done. what i do, is the same way that tip o'neill and ronald reagan worked together some years ago. when ronald reagan ran for office, he laid out the principles he was going to foster. he said he was going to lower tax rates. he said he was going to broaden the base. have you said the same thing, simplify the tax code, broaden the base. i want to bring down the tax burden on middle-income families. i will work with congress to say, what are the ways to bring down deductions? one way would be to have a single number -- make up a number, 25,000 -- 50,000, anybody can have deductions up
to that amount. and that number disappears for high-income people. one could follow bowl etion-simpson and make deductions that way. there are alternatives to the objective i have, which is to bring down rate, broaden the base, simplify the code and create incentives for growth. with regard to health care, you have remarkable details with regard to my pre-existing plan. you studied up on my plan. i do have a plan for pre-existing conditions. what we did in massachusetts is a model for the nation -- state by state. i said that at that time. the federal government taking over health care for the entire nation and whisking aside the 10th amendment, which gives states the rights for these things is not the course for america to have a stronger, more vibrant economy. >> jim: that's a terrific segue to our next segment. it is the role of government. and let's see, role of
government. you are first on this, mr. president. the question is this: do you believe -- both of you -- but you had the first two minute on this, mr. president -- do you believe there is a fundamental difference between the two of you as to how you view the mission of the federal government? >> well, i definitely think there are differences. the first role of the federal government is to keep the american people safe. that's its most basic function. as commander in chief, that is something that i have worked on and thought about every single day that i have been in the oval office. but i also believe that government has the capacity-- the federal government has the capacity to help open up opportunity and create ladders of opportunity and to create frameworks where the american people can succeed. the genius of america is the free enterprise system. freedom.
the fact that people can go out there and start a business, work on an idea, make their own decisions. but as abraham lincoln understood, there are also some things we do betters together. in the middle of the civil war, abraham lincoln said the, let's help to finance the transcantinental railroad. let's start the national academy of sciences. let's start land-grant colleges because we want to give these gateways of opportunity for all americans because if all americans are getting opportunity, we are all going to be better off. that doesn't restrict people's freedom. that enhances it. and so what i have tried to do, as president, is to apply those same principles. when it comes to education. what visaid is, we have to reform schools that are not working, we use something call race to the top t. wasn't a top-down approach, governor. what we have said is to states, we will give you more money, if
you initiate reforms. as a consequence, you had 46 states around the country who have made a real difference. but what i have also said, let's hire another 100,000 math and science teachers to make sure we maintain our technological lead and so people are skilled and able to suckicide and hard-pressed states right now can't all do that. in fact, we have seen layoffs of hundreds of thousands of teachers over the last several years. and governor romney doesn't think we need more teachers. i do. i think that that is the kind of investment where the federal government can help -- it can't do it all -- but it can make a difference. as a consequence, we will have a better-trained workforce. and that will create jobs because companies want to locate in places where we have a skilled workforce. >> jim: two minutes, governor on the role of government. >> i love great schools. massachusetts, our schools are ranked number 1 of all 50 states. the key to great schools. great teachers. i reject the judged that i don't
believe in great teachers or more teachers. every state should make that decision on their own. the role of government -- look behind us, the constitution and the declaration of independence. it is to promote and protect the principles of those documents. first, life and liberty. we have a responsibility to protect the lives and liberties of our people. that means the military second to none. i do not believe in cutting our military. i believe in maintaining the strength of america's military. second, in that line that says, we are endowed by our creator with our rights, i believe we must mintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country. that statement says we are endowed by our creator with the right to pursue happiness. that means that those who are less fortunate and can't care for themselves are cared for by one another. we are children of the same god and we care for those who have
difficulties, the elderly and have problems and challenge, those who are disabled. we care for them. we look for discovery and innovation, all of these things, desire -- out of the american heart to provide the pursuit of happiness for our citizens. wu we also believe and maintain for individuals, the right to pursue their dreams. want to have the government substitute itself for the rights of free individuals. what we are seeing right now is in my view, a trickle-down government approach, which has government thinking it can do a better job than free people pursuing their dreams. and it's not working. the proof is 23 million people out of work. the proof is 1 of 6 people in poverty. the proof is we have gone from 32 million on food stamps to 47 million on food stamps. the proof of that is that 50% of college graduate there is year can't find work -- >> jim: time. >> we know the path we are dakeing is not working. it's time for a new path. >> jim: let's go through specifics in the role of
government. education. does the federal government have a responsibility to improve the quality of public education in america? >> lthe primary responsibility for education is, of course, at the state and local level. but the federal government can play a very important role. i agree with secretary arty duncan and the ideas he has put forward on race to the top -- some of them. >> not all of them. the federal government can get scploal state schools to do a betterrion job. i have add to that, i believe, i want the kids that are getting federal dollars from i.d.e.a. or title 1, disabled kids or poor kids, or lower-income kids, rather, i want them to be able to go to the scoot of their choice. so all federal fund, instead of going to the state or to the school district, i would have go, if you will, follow the child and let the parent and the child decide where to send their student. >> jim: how do you see the federal government's responsibility to, as i say, improve the quality of public
education in this country? >> as i have indicated, it has a significant role. in the race to the top program, we have worked with republican and democratic governors to initiate major reforms. >> jim: do you do you think youa difference with your views and those of governor romney on education? >> this is where budgets matter because budgets reflect choices. so when governor romney indicates that he wants to cut taxes and potentially benefit folks like me and him and to pay for twe are having to initiate significant cuts in federal support for education, that makes a difference. you know, his runningmate, congressman ryan put forward a budget that reflects many of the principles that governor romney's talked about. and it wasn't very detailed. this seems to be a trend. but what it did do is if you
extrapolate how much money we are talking about, you would look at cutting the education budget up to 20%. when it comes to community colleges, we are seeing great work done out there, all over the country because we had the opportunity to train people for jobs that exist right now. one of the things i suspect governor romney and i probably agree on, getting businesses to work with community colleges so they are setting up their training programs -- >> jim: do you agree -- >> let me finish the point -- [overlapping dialogue] >> they're partnering so that they're designing training programs and people who are dwg through them know there is a job waiting for them. that makes a big difference. but that requires federal support. let me just say one final example. when it comes to making college affordable, whether it's two year or four year, one of the things i did as president, we were sending $60 billion to
banks and lendsers as middle men for the student loan program, though the loans were guaranteed. so there was no risk for the banks or lenders, but they were taking billions out of the system. we said, why not cut out the middle man and as a consequence, we have provided millions more student assistance, lower or keep low interest rates on student loans and this is an example of where our priorities make a difference. governor romney -- i genuinely believe cares about education. but when he tells a student that you know, you should borrow money from your parents to go to college, that indicates the degree to which, you know, there may not be as much of a focus on the fact that folks like myself, and folks like michelle, kid who is attend university of denver just don't have that option. and for us to be able to make sure that they have that opportunity and they can walk through that door, that's
vitally important, not just to those kids. it's how we are going on grow this economy over the long term. >> jim: we are running out of time. respond to that. >> mr. president,,as president, you are entitled to your own plane and house, but not the facts. i don't have a plan to cut education funding, grants to college, i am not planning to make change there is. but you make a very good point. the place you put your money makes a clear indication of where your heart is. you put $90 billion into green jobs. look, i am all in favor of green energy. $90 billion. that would have hired 2 million teachers. $90 billion. and these businesses, many of them have gone out of business. half of the ones that have been invested in, have gone out of business. a number of them are owned by contributors to your campaigns. look, the right course for america's government -- we are
talking about the role of government -- is not to become the economic player, picking winners and losers, telling people what kind of health treatment they can receive, tationing over the health care system that has existed in this country for a long, long time and has produced the best health records in the world. the right answer is to say, how do we make the private sector more efficient and effective? how do we get schools to be more effective? let's grade them so parents know which schools are succeeding and failing so they can take a child to a school that's more successful. i don't want to cut our education commitment. i want to make it more eventive and efficient. by the way, i have had that experience. i don't just talk about t. i have been there. massachusetts schools are number 1. i care about education for our all of our skids. >> jim: we barely have 3 minutes
left. i am not going to grade the two of you and say your answers have been too long or i have done a poor job i. you have done a great job. >> jim: but the fact is, the role of government and governorring -- we have lost a pod, in other words. so we only have 3 minutes left, in the debate before we go to your closing at the same times. so i want to ask, finally here -- and remember, we have 3 minutes total time here. and the question is this: many of the legislative functions of the federal government right now are in a state of paralysis, as a result of partisan gridlock. if elected, in your case fre-elected in your case, what would you do about na? governor? >> jim, i had the great experience -- it didn't seem like it at the time, of being elected in a state, where my legislature was 87% democrat. so i figured out from day 1, i had to get along and work across the aisle.
we drove our schools to be number 1 in the nation. we cut taxes 19 time it's. >> jim: what would you do as presidents. e >> in i will sit down on day 1 -- the day after i get elected. i will sit down with the democratic leaders, as well as republicans and continue -- as we did in my state, we met every monday for a couple of hours, talkedded about the issues and the challenges in our state nthat case. we have to work on a collaborative basis, not because we are going to compromise our principle but because there is common ground. the challenge that america faces. look, the reason i am in this race, there are people who are really hurt being. we mase face this dev sate sit that could crush the future generations. what is happening in the middle-east? there are developments around the world that are of real concern and republicans and democrats both love america. but we need to have leadersship, leadership in washington that will bring people together and get the job done and could not care less if it's a republican or a democrat. vidone it before. i doll it again.
>> jim: mr. president? >> first of all, i think governor romney is going doff a busy first day because he will have to repeal obamacare, whichingly not be happy with the democrats as you are sitting down with them. look, my philosophy has been, i will take ideas from anybody -- democrat or republican, as long as they are advancing the cause of making the middle-class families stronger and giving ladders of opportunity to the middle class. that's how we cut taxes for small businesses and families. that's how we cut $dwonr 1 trillion that wasn't advancing that cause. we signed three trade deals into law, helpingitous double our exports and sell more american productsarn the world. that's how we repealed don't ask/don't tell. that's how we end the the war in iraq and that's how we are going to wind down the war in afghanistan. that's how we ended al qaeda and bin laden. we have seen progress in the republican-controlled house of representatives. but ultimately, part of being
principled, part of being a leader is being able to describe exactly what you intend to do, not just saying, i will sit down. but have you to have a plan. number 2, what's important is occasionally, you have to say no to folks both in your own party and the other party. you know, yes, have we had fights between me and the republicans when they fought back against us, reining in the excesses of wall street? absolutely. that was a fight that needed to be had. when we were fighting about whether or not we were going to plac sure that american his more security with their health insures -- insurance and they said no, yes, that was a fight we needed to have. part of leadership and governing is both saying when it is that you are for, but also being willing to say no to this sm things. i have to tell you, governor romney, when it comes to his own party in the course of this campaign, has not displayed that willingness to say no to the more extreme parts of his party. >> jim: that brings us to
closing statements. a coin toss. governor romney, you won the toss. you elected to go last. so you have a closing 2 minutes. mr. president. >> i want to thank you, jim. i want to thank governor romney. i think this was a terrific debate. i very much appreciate it. i want to thank the university of denver. you know, four years ago, we were going through a major crisis. and yet, my faith and confidence in the american future is undiminnished. the reason is because of its people. because of the woman i met in north carolina, who decide at 55 to go back to school because she wanted to inspire her daughter and has a job from that new training she has, because ever a company in minnesota, willing to give up salaries and perks for their executives, to make sure they didn't lay off workers in a recession, the auto workers in toledo or detroit, take such
pride in building the best cars in the world, not just because of a paycheck but because it gives them a sense of pride that they for helping to build america. the question now is how do we build on those strepgs? everything i have tried to do and am proposing, in terms of improving the education system and developing american energy or making sure we are closing loopholes for companies shipping jobs overseas and focusing on small companies creating jobs in the united states or closing the deficit in a responsible, balanced way that allows us to invest in our future, all of those things are designed make sure that the american people, their genius, their grit, their determination... is channeled and they have an opportunity to succeed. everybody's getting a fair shot. everybody's getting a fair share and playing by the same rules. you know, four years ago, i said that i am not a perfect man and
i wouldn't be a perfect president. that's probably a promise that governor romney thinks i've kept. but i also promised that i would fight every single day on behalf of the american people, and the middle class and all of those who striving to get in the middle class. i have kept that promise. if you will vote for me, then i promise i will fight just as hard in a second term. >> jim: governor romney. >> thank you, jim. mr. president. thank you for tuning in this evening. thanksgiving an important election. i am concerned about america. i am concerned about the direction america has been taking over the last four years. i -- i know this is bigger than election about the two of us, as individuals. it's bigger than our respective parties. this lrkz is about the course of america. what kind of america dowrpt to have for yourself and for your children? there are two very different paths that we began speakerring about. we will have two more presidential debates and a vice-presidential debate.
and we will talk about the two paths. and they lead in very different directions. it is not just the words. you can look at the record. there is no question in my mind, if the president were to be re-elected, you will continue to see a middle-class squeeze with incomes going down and prices going up. you will see chronic unemployment. we have 43 straight months of unemployment above 8%. if i am president, i will help create 12 million new jobs in this country, with rising incomes. the president's re-elected, obamacare will be fully installed. in my view, that's going to mean a different way of life for people who counted on the insurances plan they had in the past. many will lose it. premiums will go up $2500 per family. if i am elected, we won't have obamacare. we will put in place the principles i have in my own state and get states to get people insured and focus on getting the cost of health care down. if the president were to be re-elected, you will see a $716
billion cut to medicare. you will have four million people who will lose medicare advantage, hospitals and providers that will no longer accept medicare patients. i will restore that $716 billion to medicare. finally, military. the president's re-elected, you will see dramatic cuts to the military. the secretary of defense says these would be devastating. i will not cut our commitment to our military. i will keep america strong and get america's middle class working again. thank you, jim. >> jim: thank you, governor. thank you, mr. president. the next debate will be the vice-presidential event on thursday, october 11 at center o'clock in danville, kentucky. for now, from the university of denver, i'm jim lehrer. thank you and gbts. ooh thank you and good night. [cheers and applause] did
americans republican and and democrat need leadership and he is prepared to provide it.ovid the president keeping his cool which was said by the punditsbe to be one of the challenges for him tonight and saying leadership requires more than just lofty goals, it requires specifics and he didn't see see them from the governor. mitt romney looking mostly oh he veronica moser at president at president obama when making his points and president obama be looking mostly at jim lehrer or looking down. wanting to communicate directly to the viewers at home, past the moderator. there was mostly respectful sparring in a robust debate. the moderator, jim lehrers was not nrsly in control, but not ineffective. this is the first time we have seen the candidates go back and forth. instead of hearing from a moderator, we got to hear from
them. >> that's right. he watched a lot of the time, as the candidates went back and forth. you know, we were wondering what governor romney would be like, coming in, whether he would go on the offensive. that really was answered in the first few minutes. he was energetic and aggressive. he knew his brief. it seemed like he was a defender of the free markets and his business experience. in the first 30 to 40 minutes, seemed to make significant points. president obama in that same time, didn't seem as energetic and seemed defensive at points. but he came back to a common theme that he wanted governor romney to provide specifics for a number of the romney/ryan plans, which he hit on a number of times. he felt most comfortable, it seemed, defending obamacare, looking right into the camera. we didn't seem to have that moment that, sometimes debates have. but there was an exchange about the deficit and debt, talking about the simpson-bowles plan,
that had an interesting back and forth. take a listen. e >> in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. now, i like green energy as well, but that's about 50 years worth of what oil & gas receives, exon and mobile this. $2.8 billion goes largely to small company, drilling operators and so forth. but if we get that tax rate down to 25%, that $2 important 8 billion is on the table. that's probably not going to survive. but don't forget, you put $ninety billion, like 50 years worth of breaks into soular and wind, to solyndra, fisker, i have a friend who said, you don't just pick the winners and losers, you pick the losers. >> he was talking about the energy plan. president obama picking losers. we will get the simpson-bowles
one. let's bring in the panel for analysis. brit hume and joe trippi. okay, brit. your thoughts? >> well, you are right, governor romney came out. he was aggressive. when do you that, you are always in danger of seeming rude or... pugneighbors. i don't think he d. -- bug -- pugnacious. high seemed to display extraordinary knowledgeability. i don't think president obama had a bad night in the sense that he was way off his game. he was a lot like the president obama we are used to hearing. i don't think he seemed rusty. but i don't think he had the spark or the energy or the precision tonight that governor romney had. governor rom he in a good night. he didn't have a big moment that becomes a sound bite and affects how people look back on the debate. but this was a strong performance by governor romney.
he needed one. i think he got it. >> joe? >> i think romney did himself a lot of good tonight. he was there on the issues. he knew his stuff. he didn't back down to the president or the moderator. and he didn't -- he didn't cross the line because you can do that and i think that would have backfired on him. i watched obama debate a lot in primaries when i was with edwards and clinton and john ed wards. this is the guy who showed up. he's a good debeirut. but he doesn't enjoy. it you look at this. romney looked like -- i am here, this is great, i am having fun. he really did. and obama looked sort of sour and like it was another headache to have to be there. that won't help. the question here, rom flow's supporters needed to be reinvigorated. he definitely got that out of tonight. what did happen with the
undecided? did women move? you know, is that enthusiasm going to spread out and show up in the differential in terms of who will vote? >> was there body language you noticed? >> to the extent, i thought they both behaved with considerable dignity and respect. so i don't think anybody lost on body language. but the president was continually looking down and he was sometimes having an expression on his face that may have seemed like a smirk. that never helps you. they really never do. on balance, i thought that governor romney's body language was good. the expression on his face, an expression, are familiar with, it's kind of a half smile, not a smirk. he was looking at the president, while he spoke, was probably better than having him looking down as president obama did. on body language, if that's what that for everybody. >> i want to give everybody a point of view. this is the spin room.
these signs are people that are trying to spin reporters, to try to get reporters to come over to them and tell them what they thought. we can seeac ax getting ready for an interview next to us. with that, panel thanks and lite go to "on the record with greta van susteren." greta? >> greta: thank you. we are here with pat buchanan, a senior adviser of president nixon, ford and reagan and a former presidential candidate himself. pat, what do you think? >> i don't think governor romney could have done a better job. it was outstanding. i have never seen him eye mean, he was tremendously aggressive, but friendly. and the in the -- the president was on the defensive. but in terms of his knowledge on the issues and on every single question, i think it was the best performance of any debate i have seen him do. if i had to mark this as a 15-round fight, i think that governor romney won 13 of 15
rounds, i expect republicans to like his performance tonight. so i went on twitter to see how the biggest cheerleaders of twitter. bill maher, gave $1 million, tweeted this. he said, i can't believe i am saying this, but obama looks like he does need a teleprompter. he tweets, obama made a lot of great points, but most of them were for romney. he is getting hammered by his own teammates. >> he did not seem to be comfortable there. he seemed flustered at times. he was on the defensive almost the entire time. the governor kept coming back at him with a smile on his faille face in a friendly manner. i don't think the president made any grave mistake tonight. but if he were your champion, have you to be disappointed because governor romney really needed to do something here to invigorate his troops and i think he did it.
as i say, i don't know how high could have done a better job. these are sort of onekish subjects. he has the material down cold. i will say this, you understood why he was a very effective executive when he walked into a room and made decisions. the man knows his onions on all of these issues. maybe after 2 years of being in there, he was really at the to which -- at the to whichr top of his game. they have a right to be proud. i think they will get a boost in energy and fire for their troops. >> greta: they do get a bounce, how do you maintain your bounce? another tweet, mike murphy, republican strategist, he said, it's funny, tonight, romney is much better than his campaign. obama's far worse. >> i think that's exactly right. the romney we have all seen -- even those of us who support him, will agree he's made some steps andma made inelegant statements and things that have contributed to an impression that he had to vanquish tonight. that's one thing he did, he had
to vanquish the idea that he is out of touch. a be november issue, on the tax cuts and medicare and these things, talking about... again, it's hard to see how he could have done a bettered job. there was no defining moment there such as there guagain that will be repeated, i believe. but other than that, that was one of the finest deby reaction. stay tuned, bret and geeingyn will be right back in just a moment.
>> governor, what about simpson-bowles, do you support it? >> the president should have grabbed that -- >> flow, i mean, do you support simpson-bowles? >> i have my own plan. but in my view, the president should have grabbed. it if you want adjustment, take it, make adjustments, to it -- [overlapping dialogue] >> you have been president four
years. you said you would cut the deficit in half, it's four years later. we have trillion-dollar deficits. the cbo says we will have a trillion-dollar deficit the next four years. have you said before you would cut the deficit in half. i love this idea of $4 trillion in cuts, ways to reduce or get closer to a balanced budget, but we show trillion life dollar exe two men on that. welcome back to the university of denver. behind me in the hall, on the debate floor, the people are milling about. now the action is over with bret in spin alley. but first, we want to go to chris wallace, who is in wash wawash with his own take on how the night went. chris? >> reporter: hey. you know, i have been thinking and trying to put it in historical context, what tonight reminded me of more than any other debate, the first kerry/bush debate, where john kerry took the battle to george bush. and bush, the president, seemed
very uneasy, didn't seem comfortable and like he wanted to be challenged. that's wha look. i got five boys. i'm used to people saying something that is not always true but keep repeating it and hoping i'll believe it but that is notthink we have to talt the debate and the debate rules and the moderator. you know, the idea -- they were very excited, the debate commissioned about the 15-minute pods to allow more exchange. but it allowed more, longer speeches and talking points. jim lehrer, a man for whom i have tremendous esteem, seemed to lose control of the debate, occasionally. he seemed to throw something out there to keep the conversation going, sometimes it seemed to be helping obama, like saying, you are for a balanced approach of tax cuts and>> thank you.
bret, at the beginning of the show, you were jealous of me because i was with the action and now you are with the action. >> yes. chris wallace has good analysis and he can pick good times. coming up, charles krauthammer on who came out on top. he joins us after this break. [ male announcer ] if you had a dollar for every dollar car insurance companies say they'll save yoby switching, you'd have like, a ton of dollars. but how are they saving you those dollars? a lot of companies might answer "um" or, "no comment." then there's esurance. born online, raised by technology, and majors in efficiency. so whatever they save, you save. hassle, time, paperwork, hair-tearing-out, and yes, especially dollars. esurance. insurance for the modern world. click or call.
number three, i will not under any tirk stances raise taxes on middle income families. >> governor romney the first 30 minutes of the debate spent on taxes. and this issue take up many times throughout the 90 minutes. welcome back to denver in the spin room. let's go now to charles krauthammer with his thoughts on the debate. >> i thought romney won by two touchdowns. you know? when a challenger steps up on the stage that gives stature, when performing the way romney did, i think changes things. it changes momentum. romney campaign is at a terrible month. to the extent people are saying who is this guy? all of a sudden thrk romney shows up. and he's knowledgeable, confident and he's got nerve. he never backed down on any of
with obama, i thought he had a weak night. it looked as if he's sitting on a leaf. i can guarantee you had he been behind in the post he would have had it at 47%. the video damaged romney didn't come up. that is somebody thinks all he has to do is get up there, play out the 90 minutes, hold the ball, and win. but he lost. again, it's not going to change the election. but i think it does stop the romney slide. it is not just that energizes the base. people who heard millions of dollars worth of ads about romney he's gordon degecko of our times there is this guy saying he has ideas and perhaps some are wrong. but he's got concern for the country and he knows his stuff. so i think in hopes to wipe away that advantage that obama
had from this huge amount of advertising you've seen and i think we might begin to see a slight narrative. perhaps a going to be a lot different. >> charles, thas always. >> pleasure. >> and fox news teamed up with folks at twitter to find out what you had to say. during the debate twitter keeping tabs on when this triggered a discussion online. this became most tweeted political event of all time. some of the hottest topics tonight total volume of treats tweets is up to more than four million of of those, four topics jumped out. first, economy. 3%. and second, health care, 0%. third, taxes 18 and fourth, education. 12%. for some perspective this sent a record. second place goes to president obama speech. he had 52,000 tweets per
minute. tonight's doubled that number z within the first 30 minutes. twitter. .com. you can check out fox news.com your other news source you know, greta i continue to say twitter is great but nanna has no idea what i'm talking about right now. nanna, nanna @ nanna. >> there gou. >> when we come back a final thought live from denver, keep it here.
the fact is that if you're the race the way you describe, governor, it's not possible to come up with enough loopholes that only affect high income individuals to avoid either raising the deficit or burdening the middle class. it's math. it's arithmetic. >> you heard that line from the president a couple times about math. post game reaction over the spin alley behind you.
david axel dgs rod said romney is a good debateor but it's not a game changer z saying if this was a game the ref would have called it. there you have it. both sides weighing in on what you're going see. >> just to give you a shot of what we're seeing this is david axel rod. if we take this camera, you can see they're gathered around and he's talking about the debate. and is saying it's not a game changer. clearly the obama campaign, you know, were trying to spin their way on this one. and it's interesting night, and governor romney clearly had a good night by all accounts. even the obama folks and we'll see where it goes from here. >> and you'll be able to tell by who breaks a sweat behind you. >> that is right.